Ygmir, just for the sake of conversation, let's take the two candidates, and how you feel about them personally, out of the equation and talk philosophy and what each party stands for based on their official platform. Only using that as your evaluation criteria, which one can you more closely relate with and which philosophy, based solely on their written platform, would like to see as the path for our country? (I am assuming that you have read both platforms.)

JKhttp://www.mudskippercafe.comWhen I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle.Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.

jkisha wrote:Ygmir, just for the sake of conversation, let's take the two candidates, and how you feel about them personally, out of the equation and talk philosophy and what each party stands for based on their official platform. Only using that as your evaluation criteria, which one can you more closely relate with and which philosophy, based solely on their written platform, would like to see as the path for our country? (I am assuming that you have read both platforms.)

are we staying within the two party system, JK?and, do we suppose, that a candidate will adhere directly to the party platform?

jkisha wrote:Ygmir, just for the sake of conversation, let's take the two candidates, and how you feel about them personally, out of the equation and talk philosophy and what each party stands for based on their official platform. Only using that as your evaluation criteria, which one can you more closely relate with and which philosophy, based solely on their written platform, would like to see as the path for our country? (I am assuming that you have read both platforms.)

are we staying within the two party system, JK?and, do we suppose, that a candidate will adhere directly to the party platform?

I've thoroughly read the party platforms in some time........

Yes, two parties only for the sake of this conversation. And no assumptions can be made regarding the candidates and their ability to adhere to said platform.

JKhttp://www.mudskippercafe.comWhen I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle.Then I realised that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.

jkisha wrote:Ygmir, just for the sake of conversation, let's take the two candidates, and how you feel about them personally, out of the equation and talk philosophy and what each party stands for based on their official platform. Only using that as your evaluation criteria, which one can you more closely relate with and which philosophy, based solely on their written platform, would like to see as the path for our country? (I am assuming that you have read both platforms.)

are we staying within the two party system, JK?and, do we suppose, that a candidate will adhere directly to the party platform?

I've thoroughly read the party platforms in some time........

Yes, two parties only for the sake of this conversation. And no assumptions can be made regarding the candidates and their ability to adhere to said platform.

I have to go carve some granite now.......but this sounds interesting. so, if you don't mind, I'll address it later in the day?

Ugly Dougly wrote:The truth, as one wise man once said, is usually somewhere in between the two.

On the other hand, what about Gary Johnson?Of course he doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of getting elected. But convictions are like bus stops, they're no good unless you stand by them.

Well if there are only two parties, the republicans and the democrats, then surely we can examine their records. And in light of their records, being as bad as they then must we vote for the lesser of two evils as there is no other choice?

Box Burner wrote:Well if there are only two parties, the republicans and the democrats, then surely we can examine their records. And in light of their records, being as bad as they then must we vote for the lesser of two evils as there is no other choice?

So said King George. And you know how we voted on that.

I can say or think anything I want about the two.. Votes from the Northwest don't count.. By the time Or. counts it has been all over for hours.. Except for the moaning great gnashing of teeth

jkisha wrote:Ygmir, just for the sake of conversation, let's take the two candidates, and how you feel about them personally, out of the equation and talk philosophy and what each party stands for based on their official platform. Only using that as your evaluation criteria, which one can you more closely relate with and which philosophy, based solely on their written platform, would like to see as the path for our country? (I am assuming that you have read both platforms.)

this is tough, JK, a challenge to be sure.I feel I'm being asked to take a bite of a turd sandwich, then a sip of piss soup, and say which is better.

My problem here, is I feel so disenfranchised by both parties (I've belonged to both, at times in my life), and am so cynical, of anyone in high office or positions of power, that as I parse their individual platforms, I find my self chuckling as often as thinking they are serious.

They propose things, with no way to pay, the make rules, with no penalties for breaking (if they are the ones breaking said rules, or their pals), the make sweeping statements of "what we should do".....with no idea of how or if it's even possible.......they tell us who we should help, and how, whom we should hurt, and how..........They lead us down the primrose path, with candies and promises, and showing enough leg, for us to think we'll get "lucky", but in the end (literally and figuratively) we are the ones getting screwed.they reap the fruits of our labor, and expect us to thank them, for giving some back.......and to applaud how they spend the rest, all in the interest of furthering their power, and hold on same.They are true robber barons.......immune in their white castle in D.C. from prosecution for the same crimes they legislate we go to prison for.........and are rewarded with care and privilege, their entire lives.

they boldly lie to us, and expect us, to believe it, at true, if we hear it enough........they deny and deny, until we get sick of hearing it, and focus our attentions on some petty dick tater (on purpose) in some far away land, and how he's going to blow up someone else, whom they say are our friends...........and how our friends, "play" us. and we smile.......

Both parties, have been in power, enough, that if they were "ANY" good, we'd be fine.........we'd stay on course, and they'd be re-elected often..........well, nope. They hide and bury their deceits deep in warrens of obfuscation, and dare us to find where "it" started.........we wont', and can't.

in the end, I think they're all buddies, back slapping and hand jobbing....laughing as we run in circles, chasing one crisis after another, that they create to keep us thusly occupied.Two sides of the same wooden nickel.......each "owning" roughly half the electorate, simply because of what they promise, but never deliver (but it's never their fault for non delivery.......the other guys messed it up). using their bully pulpit, to play "good cop, bad cop" with us, as we decide who cares about us...........none of them do..........

I say "none"........I use hyperbole here. I'm sure, there are a few, who do care, and try.......but they are eventually co-opted, thrown out, or coerced, into "towing the line" of their masters.

so, forgive my ramble friend JK......but I have no other way, to address your query, that I can stand behind and take as my own.

Even ignoring that I don't like Mitt (and coming from Utah, this was waaaaaay before he even mentioned his presidential aspirations), I don't think four years is long enough to really see what a president can do. The first half of the term is the president getting up to speed on being the president, the second half is fighting the other party to earn a second election. Some plans are set into motion, but the full effects of them are never seen. For example, Bush Jr. started the Iraq War, but still by the next election cycle it really wasn't a problem; only years later would we see how far it could devolve. More importantly (because the economy sways voters, not wars), we never got to see the effects of Bush's economic decisions until late in his second term. So what happens with Obama? He has is Obamacare that just barely made it out of the courts this year. He's also mid-way through a financial crisis that he gets praise and blame for, but who knows the mid-long-term effects? Hell, two terms may not be enough.

I'd actually prefer to have presidential terms be 8-years long, with a no-confidence vote between. Barring that, I want to see what Obama can do with a second term, just like any president, including Bush Jr.

"The essence of tyranny is not iron law. It is capricious law." -- Christopher Hitchens

Well, sorry, our great land will take decades to get back to the prosperity and respect that it once had. Maybe. That's only if we citizens suddenly stopped fighting each other and worked together to heal our country.Well, fat chance of that happening, huh? It's nice to dream sometimes.

Ugly Dougly wrote:Well, sorry, our great land will take decades to get back to the prosperity and respect that it once had. Maybe. That's only if we citizens suddenly stopped fighting each other and worked together to heal our country.Well, fat chance of that happening, huh? It's nice to dream sometimes.

on target, as usual Dougly.........we can't do it as disparate groups, all wanting more than the other and trying to take "theirs"...........because they "don't deserve/can afford" it.........if we could clear the ego maniacal inbred bastards in D.C. and get back to basic constitutional government, no back rooms, no presidential decrees, no off session appointments........no "black budget"..........put it ALL on the table.........in easy to read language......

oh I could go on and on.........and maybe mostly, people maybe start taking personal responsibility......do what you can, deal with your actions.

If this isn't enough to make you vote against the moron currently in the White House, or vote Democratic at all (assuming you have a job, earn a paycheck, and pay taxes; if that's not you, then Obama's your guy) then I don't know what will.